From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Karl Fogel Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bug statistics Date: Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:40:55 -0400 Message-ID: <87vd97hot4.fsf@red-bean.com> References: <1focf1eb1p.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <874ogsthn2.fsf@red-bean.com> Reply-To: Karl Fogel NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1277430072 21364 80.91.229.12 (25 Jun 2010 01:41:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Jun 2010 01:41:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dan Nicolaescu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 25 03:41:10 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ORxuj-0005dh-OE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Jun 2010 03:41:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35732 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ORxui-00014D-Pv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:41:04 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=39374 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1ORxuc-00013p-Uu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:41:00 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ORxub-0004Om-Fv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:40:58 -0400 Original-Received: from osh-net-219-98.onshore.net ([66.146.219.98]:33147 helo=sanpietro.red-bean.com) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ORxub-0004OW-CP; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:40:57 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59556 helo=kfogel-work ident=kfogel) by sanpietro.red-bean.com with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1ORxua-00005W-7b; Thu, 24 Jun 2010 20:40:56 -0500 In-Reply-To: (Dan Nicolaescu's message of "Thu, 24 Jun 2010 21:28:19 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:126383 Archived-At: Dan Nicolaescu writes: >Although the debbugs UI is far from ideal, do you have any evidence >that is one of the more important problems? Only anecdotal, on a very limited sample (me). I've occasionally fixed bugs but not bothered to look for them in the bug tracker because the process of doing so would be too time-consuming and difficult. I don't know how many other developers are the same way, though. >IMO the main problem is man power. > >There are >100 bugs with patches attached that have not been applied. >For a lot of these patches there's no obvious maintainer to take care >of them, so one of the maintainers would have to do it. > >Same goes about bug reports, quite a few are about areas that nobody >feels particularly attached to, so they don't get any action. Yeah. As the post I pointed to explains, I'm not sure this is actually a problem. It would be nice to apply or reject the patches, though. I don't know how to find them. Doing a search on the tag "patch" (as suggested by the text "Valid tags are patch, wontfix, moreinfo, unreproducible, fixed, notabug") claims to find 2006 bugs. Since that's exactly how many bugs total are in the tracker, it's got to be wrong. -Karl